I dunno man, to me this sounds like you want people writing about post-singularity utopia to talk about the abstract pointer “things people like,” but not talk about things people actually like.
Yeah, that is what I want people to talk about. Getting that abstract pointer gets you what people “actually want” for free. And getting that abstract pointer right is quite hard.
And more importantly, it’s just better, because it allows the intelligence to optimize over a larger space.
—
Like if you could get an ASI to make a movie for you, you could tell it specifically what to do “make it like interstellar, but it needs to have emotion xyz, and there should be an alien battle with lasers, and make sure it has no plotholes, and have this woman named Mary who speaks like Asuka from NGE, and this guy named mr M who’s handsome and has funny quips all the time, and the whole thing should be an allegory for hegel’s being-nothing-becoming, and it should have references to Roman battles throughout the movie....”
Or you could tell it to make a movie you’d enjoy, and abstractly describe what movies you enjoy. E.g. should have buildup of tension, have characters rich enough that you can empathize with them, make some kind of emotional or philosophical point, have a score that amplifies the feeling the scenes evokes.
Or you could tell it to just make the movie that would best satisfy your values/preferences, and be precise about what “satisfy”, “value”, “preferences” mean.
—
And it’s just obvious that the third would give you a better movie than the second, and the second a better movie than the first. Because if the best movie was described by the first prompt, then it could also be found by the second. And same for second third. And 1,2 are basically just telling the ASI *how* to attain something (good movie). But the ASI knows a lot more than you. So, your instructions are constraints that don’t help.
I dunno man, to me this sounds like you want people writing about post-singularity utopia to talk about the abstract pointer “things people like,” but not talk about things people actually like.
Yeah, that is what I want people to talk about. Getting that abstract pointer gets you what people “actually want” for free. And getting that abstract pointer right is quite hard.
And more importantly, it’s just better, because it allows the intelligence to optimize over a larger space.
—
Like if you could get an ASI to make a movie for you, you could tell it specifically what to do “make it like interstellar, but it needs to have emotion xyz, and there should be an alien battle with lasers, and make sure it has no plotholes, and have this woman named Mary who speaks like Asuka from NGE, and this guy named mr M who’s handsome and has funny quips all the time, and the whole thing should be an allegory for hegel’s being-nothing-becoming, and it should have references to Roman battles throughout the movie....”
Or you could tell it to make a movie you’d enjoy, and abstractly describe what movies you enjoy. E.g. should have buildup of tension, have characters rich enough that you can empathize with them, make some kind of emotional or philosophical point, have a score that amplifies the feeling the scenes evokes.
Or you could tell it to just make the movie that would best satisfy your values/preferences, and be precise about what “satisfy”, “value”, “preferences” mean.
—
And it’s just obvious that the third would give you a better movie than the second, and the second a better movie than the first. Because if the best movie was described by the first prompt, then it could also be found by the second. And same for second third. And 1,2 are basically just telling the ASI *how* to attain something (good movie). But the ASI knows a lot more than you. So, your instructions are constraints that don’t help.